It’s generally not uncharitable to assume somebody didn’t watch or read something when their immediate comment is addressed in the initial portion of an author’s thesis/argument. Knowing that you have in fact watched it makes your statement make even less sense.
It is uncharitable, because you have no reason to assume that, and even less to not inquire about what I mean if you don't understand me.
Skipping over all that dialogue and actual communication that could have happened is what makes it uncharitable.
And as I noted, there are no cursed problems, only unimaginative design and stubborness. If you don't understand that, then ask questions, talk to me, don't just make assumptions that don't engage anything I've said.
you could share why you think the core definition of a cursed problem is faulty in your eyes?
I'm no deep expert on V:tM, we avoided it like the plague back in the day, but it seems like the sort of game that it would work for is basically 'GM Story Hour', lol. Sure, some of those are likely pretty fun, I have had a couple GMs who were actually pretty good at telling a story. I never was, so always avoided that sort of thing.I don't think that's true. Its just the system was good for a different kind of game about vampires than the designers seemed to want. It had problems, but it worked well enough for some kinds of action/horror/urban fantasy campaigns as long as you stayed in the bin.
I already did.
No, you simply restated his argument for what isnt a cursed problem. So, I guess you agree with him?
there are no cursed problems, only unimaginative design and stubborness.
If you don't understand that, then ask questions, talk to me, don't just make assumptions that don't engage anything I've said.
Perhaps instead of simply dismissing an entire well reasoned talk with 5 words, you could share why you think the core definition of a cursed problem is faulty in your eyes? After all, per his definition if it was solvable with hard work and creativity it wouldn't be cursed.